Thursday, May 29, 2008

In a recent post over at my favorite topic fodder blog, a conversation about women and the priesthood ensued. Unfortunately, I feel a few things were discussed which were not appropriate for an open forum, but a few thoughts came to my mind that I thought worth copying over here.

One commenter claimed that the issues of women not holding the priesthood are important to discuss because many women are leaving the church over them. Although it is true, that many leave the church over these issues, it is also true that many who question the same issues do not leave. I can’t say what is right or wrong for individuals, but I don’t believe that membership at all costs is the end goal of the Church. I don't think that the Church should have to change their policies merely because some people want it that way.

Certain challenges have always been posed to those who profess to want to follow Christ. Whether it is the challenge of leaving their livelihood or that of public shame and ridicule, or even that of giving up a treasured hope while watching your Lord and Master die, great things have always been required of the disciples of Christ. If a person gains a testimony of the truthfulness of the Gospel, but allows a feeling of inequality to supersede that testimony, that is their choice. Being, as the commenter stated, “tired of feeling like a second-class citizen” is not in the end enough for some to turn their back on things they know to be true. I feel that being a second-class citizen - a server rather than a wielder of power - is part of the point of the Gospel. I personally believe that true power can only be found when a person paradoxically first abases and humbles oneself. Those who have discovered this power have been blessed beyond their wildest hopes because of that. All they can then do is testify to the beauty of patience and trust.

Though I hurt and feel for those going through these things (I have endured and am going through some also), it is important to understand that truth is not always comfortable when we are learning it, but we have been promised glory if we endure it well.

Another commenter began preaching that women already hold the priesthood in the temple. Although I agree with those teachings on some points, others divert from what I have found to be true. Either way, I don't feel it is appropriate to teach things we have been taught by the Spirit on a one-to-one basis. The very willingness of people to teach these things to others in this way seems to indicate to me that they are not directed by the Spirit. I don't think the Spirit would bypass the law and order God has put in place.

I don’t believe that all truths are for all people at all times. That is why the Lord said through Nephi, Isaiah and Joseph that he teaches line upon line, and light is added to light. There are reasons certain doctrines have not been revealed to the body of the Church. I don’t think it is up to me to suddenly decide to teach things I have been taught by the Spirit if they are not taught by those called to teach them (prophets), even if they are true. There is a danger that I am building up my own truth, rather than warming myself at the fire of the Lord's knowledge. It requires humility to wait and humility to realize that it is not my place.

What is more, the allegation that women hold the priesthood in the temple is not true. Though John Taylor has stated “Do they [women] hold the priesthood? Yes, in connection with their husbands and they are one with their husbands, but the husband is the head,” it is not correct to say that women hold the priesthood in the sense that men hold it. Women may perform certain priesthood functions at certain times and places, but it is always under the direction and delegation of a man who does hold the priesthood. To clarify, the priesthood is the power and authority to act as a representative of God on the earth. A woman is not ordained to this priesthood.

I don’t believe that women have to hold the priesthood to be equal before the Lord. I feel the priesthood is a calling, a special calling, to be sure, but a calling. Those called and ordained as Apostles are valued no more than those serving as nursery leaders or “mere” visiting or home teachers their whole lives. That is part of what the parable of the talents teaches us. It does not matter what callings we are given, only what we do with them. That is one of the ways my interpretation of this commenter's quotes differs from those who believe that women already hold the priesthood. I do not feel that holding the priesthood is synonymous with having all the power of God.

I also feel that for now the seeming inequality of men holding the priesthood is important for many to learn the true meaning of equality. Christ has taught us in these and similar parables that equality is not something that can be given or taken away. It only is. We are all equal, and any attempts to convince us otherwise, or to tell us that things need to change for us to be equal, comes from the Adversary. The Adversary is a master of quotes and scriptures, all the time diverting us ever-so-slightly from God’s truth. That is how he tempted Eve. We must be willing to wait upon God’s time and trust that He will teach us - and the body of the Church - at a time and in a way that is right.

Monday, May 26, 2008

So often, people think of baptism as a door by which to enter a Church. Beyond that, it seems to entail little other requirement on the part of the baptized. It gives the one baptized an unconditional "free" grace, requiring only the profession of belief in Christ. Once a person is baptized, that person can never lose Christ's grace, no matter what they do. From what I understand, this is what many Churches refer to as being "saved". Others believe that baptism is a sign of discipleship, but they don't always go into detail about what that discipleship requires.

The LDS on the other hand, believe that baptism is a covenant - in other words, a mutual promise set up by God. In covenants, we promise to do certain things, and the Lord promises certain blessings. This is the baptism of water. The LDS baptism isn't complete until a person receives the Gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands. This Gift gives receivers the right to the Holy Ghost's constant companionship. This continual influence by the Spirit eventually works the baptism by fire or the spirit, spoken of in scripture.

What is more, LDS members promise to witness of Christ all the time. It is this aspect of baptism that has me thinking lately.

I don't know if very many members of the Church really do this. I don't think it requires constantly babbling about the Church to all and sundry, but I do think it requires a level of spiritual connection that has a person ready to verbally witness at all times, and has a person nonverbally witnessing of Christ on a constant basis.

I have recently reevaluated myself by asking myself questions such as, "Am I living as a witness of Christ at work?" "How about to my family?" "Do my neighbors see and hear my witness in my behavior to them?" "Do I drive as a witness of Christ should?" I'm afraid I've found myself wanting on several counts.

Sunday, May 25, 2008

I understand that my outlook on this may be controversial, but I feel it lies at the core of my beliefs and at the core of the person I have become. Oddly, we use the phrase "one with God" frequently in Sunday School settings, but I don't think we really think about what it means.

The first step of becoming one with God is baptism. As missionaries, sometimes we get so caught up in the event of baptism, we forget the purpose of it. It isn't only to be washed clean of our sins in preparation to receive the Spirit, though it is certainly that, too. It is also a covenant to stand as God's witness all the time and to act as His hands to all His children. Essentially, it is a covenant to become one with God. We are symbolically killing the natural man to be reborn as a disciple of the divine. We are then given the gift of the Spirit to help us do that.

Becoming one with God means shame from "the world". Since I was fourteen or so, I have made some decisions that guide my behavior for which I've been mocked, and even persecuted, often by those who love me most. One of these decisions, for example, was to no longer watch PG-13 or higher-rated movies. I have my reasons for this decision. For some reason, my refusal to watch these movies strikes a cord of derision in many. I have been mocked for allowing a secular rating system determine what I watch. (For the record, I have walked out of PG movies before, so it's not as arbitrary of a decision as it seems.) I have been laughed at because I watch only "kiddie shows". I have been verbally pummeled by people wanting to share a particularly good movie with me. I have been tempted frequently over the last decade to break that decision and watch "just one". It was hardest that first year, but after the first flush of effort, it hasn't gotten much easier over the course of the next several years. There is no "happily ever after" with such things during this life.

Becoming one with God means to always have His Spirit with you, and to always be thinking about Him. Some find the thought of always having God in mind rather oppressive, or even unhealthy. Although I'm sure we have all met people who are overly pious, defining everything in terms of what is proper (much like the Pharisees), restricting laughter and stringently restricting behavior, that isn't what I believe is meant by these scriptures. God is a whole God, a balanced and complete God. The more He is in your thoughts and heart, the more balanced you become. There are no words to describe this wholeness. It purifies and sanctifies laughter and joy, as well as somberness and sorrow. Everything becomes deeper and more meaningful. Fun is more fun, sorrow is more pure. I have tasted this feeling, though I am far from completely achieving it. It is the key to the end of my depression. It is the key to my ability to forgive others of devastating blows. It is the key to true joy. It is my ultimate goal for this life.

I wish I had the ability to describe it. It is one of those things I think you have to experience to understand. I can attest to the fact that before I felt it, I had absolutely no idea that this was what the scriptures were trying to say. This is what the gospel is all about. It makes a "spiritual experience" merely a stepping stone. It makes your life into a spiritual experience.

Thursday, May 22, 2008

I have been asked, recently and otherwise, why I bother commenting at blogs such as, specifically, FMH, since I don't agree with everything they are about. I thought it a very good question, since commenting there and places like FMH usually accomplishes little besides opening me up to pigeonholing and ridicule. In thinking about it, I've come up with three main reasons which I think worth sharing. I just hope they aren't self-righteous.

I can learn more from people I disagree with than I can from those with whom I agree. Even when said people vilify and pigeonhole me, I don't hate them for it. I admit to being hurt by it (sometimes more than I wish I were), but at the same time I can understand why they do that. In the end, they are (generally speaking) hurting in some way and by trying to represent established doctrinal and conservative stances, I align myself with those they perceive as enemies. I'm gradually getting better at not seeing them as enemies in return. Blogging has taught me a lot about how to disagree with someone while loving and caring about them and how to express my opinion without taking it personally when others mock that opinion. I wouldn't have learned that by clumping up with buddies.

I was essentially stereotypically feminist once, too, so part of me still identifies with that group. No one would really believe it of me now, but I was once all about career. Marriage and children, if they happened, were to be limited. There was no way I was going to stay home with the kids and allow myself to be so restricted in my sphere. I even had a rather bad mouth on me. Needless to say, I've done a lot of humbling and changing since then. Regardless, I have been where many of them are now and I am where I am now, and having seen what both sides have to offer and chosen my preferred path, I want to share my experiences and journey. It has been a hard road, but it has been a glorious one. My vistas have been opened beyond my ability to express. My heart has been filled with joy and thanksgiving. All the niggling doubts and insecurities have been lightened. All the bitterness I once had has been softened. It is so wonderful, I want to share it, even if no one listens or cares. Even if they hate me for it. In some small way, I suppose this is similar to how Christ must feel. Even if not one of us takes Him up on His offer of redemption, I believe He would have done it anyways, just to give us the chance.

I feel drawn by the Spirit to comment there more often than elsewhere. I won't claim to pure spiritual inspiration when I comment. I often say things ham-handedly and awkwardly. I'm like any other person. I get my feelings hurt and say things I wish I hadn't. I hurt others' feelings and agonize for days over it. I struggle with my words and get frustrated with my inability to communicate. But I try my hardest to only comment when I feel moved upon by the Spirit. I seem mostly to feel moved when I see someone hurting or struggling with something and know I have some understanding to share. Many of the people on those blogs are working their ways through things I have worked through, or things I am working through. I benefit when I shine the light of their understanding on my problems and hope (against all evidence) they will benefit from mine. Perhaps that is hubris, I don't know, but it's the best I know how to do. Despite rarely, if ever, having positive things said to me there, I am not there to be back-scratched. I am there to learn.

So, that's it. I know I'm not welcome, but I go anyways because I feel the benefits validate the detriments. It may be that some day I will be led elsewhere, but for now I'm trying my best to "go where [He] want[s] me to go," no matter the cost.

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

In order to continue a few thoughts from the post I referenced last, I have observed over the last several months a tendency to put the word "know" into quotes, as if it isn't possible to know spiritual truths. Usually, it is mentioned how those bearing testimony to the truthfulness of a Gospel concept use the word, ie. "I know the Church is true and Joseph Smith is a prophet of God." While I'm not going to argue that the word know is probably overused and poorly applied in many cases, I think it is a common form of error to claim that someone cannot know a spiritual truth in every practical sense of the word.

It seems to me that you have a choice when discussing the use of words and semantics. You can get overly ponderous in the denotative meanings, or you can arbitrarily grasp for connotative meaning. Even though I hate resorting to dictionary definitions, I don't think I can avoid it in this case. Merriam-Webster defines the noun "know" in several ways:

to perceive directly : have direct cognition of

to have understanding of (importance of knowing oneself)

to recognize the nature of : discern

to recognize as being the same as something previously known

to be acquainted or familiar with

to have experience of

to be aware of the truth or factuality of : be convinced or certain of

to have a practical understanding of (knows how to write)

It seems those who claim that no one can really know things of the Spirit are looking at definitions 1) and maybe 7). They disingenuously claim that you cannot know (or most people don't know) because any claim to perceive something directly is negated by another's claim to perceive the opposite, and that you cannot be aware of the factuality of a spiritual truth for the same reason - that another may claim an opposite factuality.

This argument is entirely erroneous and fails to understand the nature of truth. If Jane is blue/yellow colorblind and sees the sky as a flat shade of blue-green, she can testify that she knows the sky is flat. If Sally can see all the shades of blue, from pale to rich, in the sky, she can testify to the gradation of color. One person's testimony does not negate another's. Mary has a doctorate in spectrophotometry. She can not only explain that there is a perceptual gradient, but also explain how it is completely based on perception and not a physical change in the makeup of the atmosphere. She can testify to a deeper truth about the sky's color. That still does not negate or invalidate the testimonies of Jane and Sally. They are still valid testimonies. Furthermore, even Mary, with all her knowledge and qualifications, can not necessarily explain the base nature of light. There is always more truth to discover.

At the risk of getting overly philosophical, the interesting thing is that intangible truths can be drawn from all three testimonies. Each of them have something to contribute to the understanding of Truth. That is why Christ taught (and teaches) at the level His disciples could understand. He was able to take truths they all knew—such as the size of a mustard seed—and draw out still greater lengths of actual knowledge. Their previous knowledge was not invalidated any more than a roof on a house invalidates the basement footings.

Most cannot understand how seemingly diametrically opposed testimonies can both be true without resorting to relativistic theory—that different things are true to different people. A better way to say it is that different people see things differently. It is a subtle parsing of meaning, but picture it as though Truth was a plant. Many would like to say that there is a different plant for each person. Rather say that there is one great plant that we all see a little differently. Once we have gained all knowledge and all understanding, we will realize that it is the same plant. We all have something to gain by sharing another's understanding.

Be careful if you feel the urge to put "know" into quotes. Just because you do not know something, doesn't mean another person does not. You are revealing far more of your own ignorance than of your superior understanding of truth.

Friday, May 16, 2008

There are few things that have infuriated me as much as what I have heard about the California judicial system's high-handed attempt to justify legalization of gay marriage while blocking the logical follow-through of legal consensual adult polygamous marriage. How can they possibly dupe themselves into believing that such an arbitrary line is just and impartial? Like the old correlation of homosexuality and child molestation, I especially "love" how they lumped it in with incest, as if the two are at all the same kettle of fish. I think it's a big kettle of rosy red herring.

The only explanation I can think for the calumny is that being pro-gay is in vogue, but pro-polygamy is not. I'm not looking to add a wife to my husband's family, but this whole situation is so utterly illogical I'm completely floored and disgusted.

Perhaps the warnings from God through the Church against danger of gay marriage legalization is only partially about gay marriage itself and even more insidiously about the corruption of the government. As the judicial system overthrows majority vote and lose whatever pretense of impartiality they had, I can see some very bad things coming down the sump pipe in the not-so-far future.

So, fire up the rainbow flag and drape it across your sequined dress and pumps because that is Politically Correct, but prepare to be burned at the stake covered in verbal waste if you show the least bit of sympathy towards something less trendy.

Thursday, May 15, 2008

There has been a flurry of conversations about the DNA "proof" that the Native Americans are not descended from Israelites, and how this "proves" that the BoM is not true or is, at best, inspired fiction. I don't think it proves anything of the sort. I don't want to write exhaustively on my entire process of faith development, unless someone really wants to hear it, but I will sum-up.

We are taught that the Lord does not do things the way a man would do them, any more than a child would eat her vegetables first if left to her own devices. God works in ways that are mysteries to us, but I know that He is loving, true and just, and that He has my eternal interests at heart. Since I do not understand what is best for me the way He does, I am willing to submit to His will and His teachings. Part of those teachings includes how to find truth. I believe that spiritual confirmation has much more to do with truth than with fact. It is intended to guide me back to Him. This is the believing part of me.

We are also taught that the doctrines of men easily creep into spiritual teachings. If you substitute "science" (a reasonable substitution for "precepts of man"), you can read: "For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have. Cursed is he that putteth his trust in man, or maketh flesh his arm, or shall hearken unto science, save their science shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost."

Here we are given a way to parse spiritual knowledge from scientific knowledge. Science, to me, is a way for man to find out about the world around him. It is not meant to replace faith. Science deals in Fact, religion deals in Truth. Most people, excepting most of the scientific geniuses, seem unable to differentiate between the two.

If the Facts don't seem to fit my knowledge of the Truth, it is because I don't have enough facts or am not understanding them properly. This may seem counterintuitive and even obstructive to a scientific method (which is why I don't use it when I'm actually performing scientific experiments), but in reality it is highly intuitive. Just like an investigator finds facts and often interprets them correctly through a "gut feeling", evidences like DNA only serve to show me there is more to the story than the Book of Mormon covers. That isn't surprising, considering it abridges over 1000 years of history and leaves out everything in the 1600 years after that. It helps to put it all into perspective when you consider the USA is only about 250 years old. Try abridging all of our salient history into a book as small as the Book of Mormon, and I'm sure you'd miss a few things, too. The Book of Mormon is not concerned with proving its factual veracity. At the risk of sounding rude, I think those who try are wasting their time. Especially when the title page itself states its purpose as "to show unto the remnant of the House of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever—And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations", not to "convincing the Jew and Gentile that Mormons are not insane and really know more than anyone else about history."

I personally feel that the Lamanites—indeed, most if not all of us—are "remnants of the house of Israel". I think their DNA is seeded throughout the world. That is why there was a scattering. It has to do with the Lord tying the whole of humankind together physically as well as spiritually through Adam and Abraham. The mere lack of definitive genetic marker doesn't change that one iota.

Lack of proof proves nothing, even according to scientific method it only indicates more study is needed. Assuming the reality of Israelite blood in Native American history doesn't mean we are able to genetically trace it. There are just too many variables. With what I understand about DNA marker tracing, we don't know nearly as much about it as we'd like to think. DNA doesn't even prove direct paternity/maternity 100% of the time, let alone a few generations back. Skepticism of scientific findings is the scientist part of me.

Wednesday, May 14, 2008

"If there were a God, there would not be so much suffering." "If there were a God, He would show Himself to me." "If there were a God . . . ." These phrases echo through the history of mankind, sometimes getting louder and more commonly uttered. I find it interesting to note that most of the time, those who feel this way do so in reaction to some perceived injustice.

As I have observed and lived the way the Father deals with me, guiding me carefully through slowly increasing paths of knowledge, I have gained a deep trust in Him and in my Savior. I do not know them as well as I wish, but I know them well enough to trust them. God has said that His entire purpose is to bring us eternal life. There is nothing greater! Although I do not understand all that this entails, I trust Him that it is glorious and wonderful beyond all imaginings. I don't worry about what exactly the Celestial Kingdom will consist of, because I know that if I humble myself to accept in gratitude the offer made to me, I will bask in it, whatever it may be. If I work, I will work in the glory of God and it will be beautiful. If I sing His praises in the choirs of heaven, it will be because my soul cannot contain my joy and gratitude. If I am married to one or to many, it will be in the spirit of perfect love and perfect communion. All that matters to me is to be with Him again, and to help as many of my brothers and sisters enjoy the same.

I am willing to trust Him in how to bring me to Him. If He says I must be baptized to apply forgiveness of Adam's sin, I will do so. If He says I must humble myself and love those I would rather avoid, I will put every effort into doing so. If He says I do not need to hold the Priesthood or anything like it now, than I will serve in the way He has asked me to. If He says I must be patient and allow Him to run His Church through men who also yearn to be with Him, that is fine by me. I have chosen to subdue my will under His will. If I am to be labeled a blind follower, than so be it. All that matters to me is how He feels about me.

I trust Him to guide me in the paths which I most need to follow. I have felt His strength pushing me down paths I would rather not have taken. I have felt His love help me be joyful in walking these paths. I do not need to listen to the "wisdom" of others who rail against the Church and her current doctrines. I feel no need to second guess the Lord.

I trust His ability to work through imperfect vessels, male and female, to bring about perfect purposes because I have felt Him work through me. What utter joy! I wish with all my power that I could share with others what lies down the path of discipleship and beyond the veil of uncertainty, pride and confidence in one's own intelligence. All must find that path in their own way. So, I am left with nothing but pleading and testimony. There is nothing in the philosophies of (wo)man that can compare! Find it. Go just a little further than you think you can. Try just a little harder to trust God. He is there, and He loves.

In the end, I know that if there were a God, He would know better than I what His children need.

Monday, May 12, 2008

I have one more observation from the conversation I mentioned previously. As people discuss the ways the doctrine and approach to the gospel have changed, I think it highly possible that such things have changed, but not in the way many are assuming. If deeper doctrines such as the future divinity of man (via King Follett discourse) and the doctrine of polygamy are being deemphasized, it could very well be for the same reasons that the children of Israel received the Aaronic priesthood.

Many seem to make the mistake of assuming because we no longer practice polygamy or emphasize man's chance to become as God is, the Church is admitting to some sort of mistake or previous error. However, the bestowal of the Aaronic priesthood and the ten commandments did not null greater knowledge, only inserted another step on the ladder. Leaders (to my knowledge) haven't come right out and said it, but it is highly possible that people are not ready for those doctrines any more. As a result, our teachings are emphasizing more of the bare bones of exaltation (faith, repentance, baptism, Holy Ghost and enduring) rather than wasting time on things few are able to understand, no matter how true they may be. For those ready, however, those deeper doctrines are waiting and can be laid open for the understanding even now.

By insisting that doctrines of the Church will and must change (such as with female priesthood) we may end up getting what we say we want, but we are only hurting ourselves in the long run by setting up our own golden calf to worship. We would do better to let God drive the bus, so to speak. One of the beautiful things about our God is that He is an unchangeable God, but He is flexible enough to teach changeable mankind at the level we can comprehend and slowly lead us, if we are willing, to greater mountains of knowledge.

Friday, May 9, 2008

I tried to write a real post, and was again unable to bring it out. But in ranging through the blogs, I came across this post at Mormon Matters which literally had me feeling a little lost and very lonely. I have struggled long and hard to try to bring my will into alignment with God's. I fought with everything I have, giving up material position and pride of place to try to reach the one goal of discipleship. I'm not saying I've been successful, only that I've done a lot of hard changing. The thought of the Church bending to accommodate those unwilling to go through this process scares me. It feels as though we are being told that in order to finish the building, we will have to use structurally unsound materials. I would rather have a smaller building which is earthquake-safe.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying every member of the Church should have to be perfect to belong, just that we should all be desiring that perfection and working on it. We should all be willing to stand as a witness, to take upon us the name of Christ, not change Christ's name to suit our stance.

As I continued reading, I came upon comment #11 by Thomas Parkin. That healed a great deal of my feelings. He is right: we have been warned of the cancer which will/may grow in the Church. But although the Church may be eaten from the inside, there is no reason why I should feel alone. There are many who feel as I do. To me, these are the true members. It is not a matter of your name being on the membership of the roles of the Church, it is a matter of Christ's name being written on your heart, just as it always has been. I, for one, will continue to work for that unity with the Divine and let the leadership worry about the grassroots changes.

Thursday, May 8, 2008

Apparently, I'm at a phase where I simply enjoy others' posts, rather than writing my own. It's a rather pleasant phase. I don't have to think so much, just bask in the light of others' intelligence. It's sort of a mental vacation!

I would highly suggest reading this post by Spunky (aptly named) on motherhood. It is obvious in reading her story that she is truly exceptional. I love hearing stories such as this, about how people overcome their insecurities and challenges. I (over) obsess about things such as this that bring me into dissonance with God and myself, and have waged a long war against the issues I have had with life, the Church and myself. I am reluctant to dump too much of my story out here, because it is very personal and because I have been burned when sharing too much before, but I deeply admire Spunky for sharing this, particularly on a site which attracts so many who are similarly hurting. Thank you, Spunky!

Tuesday, May 6, 2008

I've tried to write a new post for a few days now, but I have been stopped. I think the Lord is taking literally my expressed wish to only post when moved upon by the Spirit. Perhaps I have not been as in tune as I need to be, perhaps it is only because I am sick and cranky, perhaps it is just not my time, but it is obvious the Spirit is whispering through others.

This post on truth-seeking by Clean Cut is exactly what I would have wanted to post here. (Sometimes I wish I were better at quotes. He uses them masterfully.) Go and read it and think about how to apply it. I believe it holds one of the keys to happiness. It is just too bad that so many people see "look[ing] for strength and goodness rather than weakness and failings" as an attempt to blindly follow. I don't think anything said in that post means you can't view Church history and policy with open eyes, just that there are two ways to be blind.

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed in this blog are opinions of the blog owner and other writers or commenters. They should not be taken as official doctrine or policy of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Profanity, using this blog to advertise or push an agenda not in keeping with the Church, overtly inflammatory language, name-calling, aggressive or argumentative bias against myself, the Church or any other commenter, and other similar behaviors will not be tolerated.

If I feel the need to draw a boundary regarding discussion on this blog, you will be given a warning and a chance to change your phrasing. Commenters who demonstrate a pattern of behavior of inability to respect boundaries will not be given the benefit of the doubt until they have demonstrated a marked change in behavior.

Open discussion and expression of dissenting opinion, so long as it remains thoughtful and respectful to all parties, is encouraged.